I think you may have answered your own question . . . “involvement of Congress”. He does it because HE HAS GOTTEN AWAY WITH IT BEFORE. Congress, for some reason, is just flat out too spineless to call him on it . . . AND SO IS SCOTUS!

So, he has discovered that he can run over Congress AND SCOTUS, so why not continue that behavior?

The only thing that may stop him is if he gets too bold and makes ignoring the Constitution so blatant that even his own party would be inclined to resist (judging that they wouldn’t get re-elected if they supported his blatant nonsense.)

But so far, he has been politically astute enough to go with what he knows Joe Sixpack, in unwashed masses ignorance, will support.

However, if he ever gets so cocky that he ignores his own supporters, he may get caught. But as long as he just pushes the envelope and steps up to the line and doesn’t cross it (and don’t misunderstand . . . as far as the opposition is concerned, including myself, he HAS indeed stepped over the line, repeatedly. But I’m talking about the line established by the idiot voters, Joe Sixpack and the unwashed masses.), he will continue to do this.

I actually do hope he oversteps himself and DOES get too cocky, and tries something that even the idiots would recognize as destroying the Constitution. Unfortunately, I’m not so sure he’s that politically dumb. Administratively and substantively dumb? Yes. Politically dumb? No.

I think you may have answered your own question . . . “involvement of Congress”. He does it because HE HAS GOTTEN AWAY WITH IT BEFORE. Congress, for some reason, is just flat out too spineless to call him on it . . . AND SO IS SCOTUS!

So, he has discovered that he can run over Congress AND SCOTUS, so why not continue that behavior?

The only thing that may stop him is if he gets too bold and makes ignoring the Constitution so blatant that even his own party would be inclined to resist (judging that they wouldn’t get re-elected if they supported his blatant nonsense.)

But so far, he has been politically astute enough to go with what he knows Joe Sixpack, in unwashed masses ignorance, will support.

However, if he ever gets so cocky that he ignores his own supporters, he may get caught. But as long as he just pushes the envelope and steps up to the line and doesn’t cross it (and don’t misunderstand . . . as far as the opposition is concerned, including myself, he HAS indeed stepped over the line, repeatedly. But I’m talking about the line established by the idiot voters, Joe Sixpack and the unwashed masses.), he will continue to do this.

I actually do hope he oversteps himself and DOES get too cocky, and tries something that even the idiots would recognize as destroying the Constitution. Unfortunately, I’m not so sure he’s that politically dumb. Administratively and substantively dumb? Yes. Politically dumb? No.

You are correct. He is shrewd, but not intelligent. And, he is a malignant megalomaniac–that is what may push him over the edge. He is so full of himself and considers himself to be above us mortals that he may lose it at some point–sort of like Nero…

[quote=“tperkins, post:4, topic:37870”]
It will be tough, but somehow any argument against Obama on this has to contain the Union angle. The Unions dump truckloads of cash into Democratic coffers each and every year.
[/quote]While I don’t disagree that the moronic unions do indeed contribute substantially to their idiot dem brethren, attacking the unions has to be done carefully (assume this jives with your “It will be tough” statement) BECAUSE in Joe Sixpack’s twisted mind, Unions are in the same sacred category as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie.

For Joe Sixpack NOT to see this as a personal attack (which the libs will portray and demonize the right with anyway), conservatives are going to have to tread lightly. It can be done, but I DON’T think the current crop of republican strategists has the skills. They are about as subtle as a sledge hammer, and I think this is going to take a smooth touch.

BHO has that “smooth touch” (slick and fraudulent in his case . . . and I’m not suggesting the right try something similar to BHO’s lies . . . trying to imitate someone else always results in disaster . . . just take off the gloves), and the repubs don’t have it. BHO and his Chicago mob (Axelrod in particular) are astute politically, and that’s why they won.

No doubt the unions need to go, but that message is going to have to be framed skillfully . . . NOT a strong suit for the conservatives right now.

While I don’t disagree that the moronic unions do indeed contribute substantially to their idiot dem brethren, attacking the unions has to be done carefully (assume this jives with your “It will be tough” statement) BECAUSE in Joe Sixpack’s twisted mind, Unions are in the same sacred category as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie.

For Joe Sixpack NOT to see this as a personal attack (which the libs will portray and demonize the right with anyway), conservatives are going to have to tread lightly. It can be done, but I DON’T think the current crop of republican strategists has the skills. They are about as subtle as a sledge hammer, and I think this is going to take a smooth touch.

BHO has that “smooth touch” (slick and fraudulent in his case . . . and I’m not suggesting the right try something similar to BHO’s lies . . . trying to imitate someone else always results in disaster . . . just take off the gloves), and the repubs don’t have it. BHO and his Chicago mob (Axelrod in particular) are astute politically, and that’s why they won.

No doubt the unions need to go, but that message is going to have to be framed skillfully . . . NOT a strong suit for the conservatives right now.

Yup. That’s the tough part, but it’s the only thing that brings or shows balance.

BobJam: Yep. It will take lots of finese and wisdom. But, there is something else that may lend a hand: the failure of unions such as the Twinkie debacle. Remember, 18,500 Americans lost their jobs because of union arrogance. I hope all those people are applying at the various companies that will be purchasing bits and pieces of their former employer. I don’t think that will be the sledge hammer that will be needed to completely topple the unions strangle-hold, but it certainly will not help them. And, the economy as it slips further into the abyss these next 4 years will also help to bring the reality of the unions to light, too.

My parents were both brought up in blue-collar families. My dad, his father, and his brother were all steamfitters. In order for my dad to be able to work as a steamfitter, he HAD to join the union–and there were all kinds of hoops he had to jump through in order to get that revered union card–not excluding $$. My uncle was an electrician and he had even more hoops to jump through. My father and his family did not like being in the union–but it was necessary for them to have work in their chosen field. I belonged to two unions: the Brotherhood of Railway Workers and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Neither did anything except collect dues and decide when I had to strike. When I had a supervisor who harassed and badgered me (and other women) I went to the union for help. They fed me to the management–and I wound up having to quit my job in order for the harassment to stop. Useless…and complicit.

Right now jobs are scarce and people will hand on to them no matter what cost they may have to pay. It will take much to topple the unions and their king. I don’t know if we have the stomach for it…

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:9, topic:37870”]
But, there is something else that may lend a hand: the failure of unions . . . and I wound up having to quit my job in order for the harassment to stop. Useless…and complicit.
[/quote]The Unions have ALREADY failed and it’s clear to many.

But, for every ten that have suffered through the experiences you have and realize that the Unions are “useless and complicit”, there is one idiot that thinks the Unions are doing him/her a favor. That one idiot is the one that BHO and brethren highlight and parade before the unwashed masses, ignoring the ten that realize Unions are a flop. For example, that’s precisely what the Union is doing with the WalMart nonsense.

And a personal example I have myself. While maybe not as direct as yours, when I was working for a Fortune 200 company, we had many facilities where the Union tried to get in. In all cases, the employees voted to keep the Union out and stay with the company benefits and wages.

The Unions tried to sue and break in regardless of what the employees wanted. Fortunately, they were NOT successful in any of their “legal” attempts (we had a good and skilled employee/labor relations group and the same for our legal group . . . the company, for all its faults and flaws, treated the employees well and that had a lot to do with it.) But there was always that one idiot, and the Unions always tried to leverage that person.

I had occasion to fire an employee that later made a claim of age discrimination with the EEOC. Fortunately, our attorneys were on top of it, saw the potential coming, and had me tediously document everything, particularly the employee’s repeated poor performance and warnings. Plus, they discovered this employee had a long record of these capricious claims with the EEOC, all having been refused by the EEOC. The guy was a “professional” scammer, and he knew how to do the dance, fill out the EEOC forms, and had been through the drill before. Fortunately too, we didn’t have a Union to deal with, and indeed he would have made the ideal Union member.

As our attorneys suspected, I was deposed, and blew them out of the water with documentation.

We need to do better at publicizing that majority that is fed up with the Unions. If the opposition highlights that one idiot, we need to blast the airwaves with the ten that will rebut that single idiot’s claims, AND rebut them strongly, dramatically, and directly. Fight fire with fire applies here.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Take the gloves off. That “soft touch” I referred to before in this thread, involves walking a fine line between drama and subtlety.

On another note, wayyy off topic, I’ve noticed that lately, you have taken a different approach to these discussions here on RO. I think it has been very productive . . . my compliments. I’d have PM’d you, but I’d like to give you public recognition (not that my approval carries any weight.)

And nooooooo, peanut gallery, I’m not just saying this because CT agrees with me here. I would have said it even if she didn’t agree.

The unions have been on their way out for several decades; they have shot themselves in the foot. But now Obama is trying release them from that responsibility, and suddenly, they have a lot more power again.

On another note, wayyy off topic, I’ve noticed that lately, you have taken a different approach to these discussions here on RO. I think it has been very productive . . . my compliments. I’d have PM’d you, but I’d like to give you public recognition (not that my approval carries any weight.)

And nooooooo, peanut gallery, I’m not just saying this because CT agrees with me here. I would have said it even if she didn’t agree.

BobJam: Thanks for the link. I’m going to check it out after I finish this comment. I thank you for your kind comments. I feel very inadequate sometimes reading all these scholarly comments. I admit that there is much I do not understand in the political philosophies. This forum and many of the members have truly given me so much to reflect upon. I’ve learned many things in just the short time I’ve been here. I don’t agree with it all, but it all helps me to understand and appreciate other views. It also has given me pause to consider some of the false beliefs I’ve had on other political ideals. I may not ever agree with some of them, but at least I can put them into proper perspective and at least take from them what is palatable and leave what is not. Again, thanks for your kind words.

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:14, topic:37870”]
I admit that there is much I do not understand in the political philosophies.
[/quote]Neither do I.

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:14, topic:37870”]
This forum and many of the members have truly given me so much to reflect upon.
[/quote]Careful on that . . . while there are indeed some pretty sharp folks on here, there are also plenty who will mislead you if you buy into some of their nonsense (names withheld.) You have to cherry pick and scrutinize. Probably stating the obvious here, especially since you’re a teacher and not dumb yourself. But just don’t be fooled by those on here that may be able to turn a good phrase and “appear” smart (we have a few like that.)

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:14, topic:37870”]
I don’t agree with it all
[/quote]Good sign.

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:14, topic:37870”]
it all helps me to understand and appreciate other views
[/quote]Good sign again.

[quote=“ClassicalTeacher, post:14, topic:37870”]
at least take from them what is palatable and leave what is not
[/quote]Wise.

Careful on that . . . while there are indeed some pretty sharp folks on here, there are also plenty who will mislead you if you buy into some of their nonsense (names withheld.) You have to cherry pick and scrutinize. Probably stating the obvious here, especially since you’re a teacher and not dumb yourself. But just don’t be fooled by those on here that may be able to turn a good phrase and “appear” smart (we have a few like that.)

Good sign.

Good sign again.

Wise.

Well, isn’t that what wives are supposed to do?? :yes: (There’s a great saying I learned years ago: “It takes men to civilize the world, but it takes women to civilize men.” I don’t remember who said that, but I decided to keep it.) We all need to have our egos checked from time to time! To me, many folks here (yourself included) are highly intelligent–scholarly even. I feel dwarfed sometimes by some here (names withheld). But, I know when I am being “conned” or when someone is trying to sell me a bill of goods. Being around teenagers (my students) for more than 25 years has given me good practice on seeing through a con job! :slayer: